It's a single player game. Only one level as far as I could see from Yogscast videos. While it does seem like a hilarious game, I can see the thrill wearing off quickly. Heck the only reason it was so popular to begin with is people hyping it on Reddit.

Yea I've tried it out. Fun little game but as Loki said, there's only one level and it's not that big really. But people have already released mods for it and I did see some different levels and stuff.

It reminds me of one of the Tony Hawk pro skater game. I guess it's the level design. It has lots of ramps and stuff scattered around. I came across a few hidden things too and collectibles. And there are tasks to do once you're finished doing random crap lol.

True but they said they couldn't add mp cause of the physics or something

I imagine mp will get added eventually. There are time trials and leaderboards, as well as other goats to fight. They would just need to expand the map and add more stuff. Just think of the game modes they could add: Goats-For-All, Team Goatmatch, Goat of the Hill... it would be epic!

Oh wow, they're adding old school splitscreen multiplayer. Remember when you used to play multiplayer games side-by-side using the same keyboard? No? Well that's how it used to be and it was more fun back then, dammit!

Kinda have to ask, did you read the article? Because it was posing far deeper philosophical questions than the headline suggests. Ignore the headline and read the article, because it actually asks some very interesting and thought-provoking questions. The headline was probably randomly chosen by the site's PR department and actually has nothing to do with the article.

Some of the more interesting bits:

Before I could reply, I saw someone running up behind her. It was JB. I was about to tell him everything was OK when he started shooting. He hit her twice in the back. She ran away and died minutes later. JB was laughing. Laughing.

“Why’d you do that?” I asked. I’ve known JB since were six years old. I’ve never seen him harm anyone.

“I don’t know,” he replied. “It was funny.”

Our perspectives on that event couldn’t have been more different. In my mind, I was interacting with a real person who needed help, while JB just saw her as just another target in an elaborate shooting gallery.

Of course, I know JB wouldn’t have gunned down a stranger in real life. But it got me thinking about people who would.

...

“One of the ways we keep ourselves moral is to imagine the terrible things we could do, but then don’t do,” Ronson says. “You stand on a train platform and think, ‘I could push that person in front of the train.’ That thought pops into your head, and it doesn’t make you a lunatic. It makes you a good person, because what you’re actually saying is, ‘Oh my god, I’m capable of doing a terrible thing, but I would never actually do it.’”

As I’m talking to Ronson on the phone, I look out the window and see an enormous truck parked across two spaces. I imagine myself using a tire iron to smash the windows, the taillights, and the headlights before scraping the Confederate flag sticker off of it.

I find myself agreeing with Ronson. Any time I’ve put myself in a situation, real or imaginary, beyond my moral limits, it allows me to clearly see where those limits lie. It’s therapeutic, and reassuring.

But we’re still left with the big question: Are our actions in a virtual world tantamount to imagining those things we could do in real life but never would? Or are we merely behaving as we would in real life if there were no consequences for our actions?

...

It might be the case that defaulting to killing people is a good strategy in these games. Perhaps the only way to play them successfully is to approach it like a paranoid mafia don, striking down all who don’t approach on bended knee. It’s one way to ensure your own survival. Someone always has to die when players meet.

But if that’s your rationale, you’d simply shoot everyone on sight. What’s the point behind drawing it out in a death match, like Klyka’s elaborate game? For a game is exactly what it was, complete with fabulous prizes. After killing the yellow jacket who attempted to flee, one of Klyka’s cronies approached the survivor and told him to choose his victory prize: saline, a bag of rice, or a box of bandages. The survivor chooses the rice.

...

That’s when I realized that my moral code in this virtual world was highly situational. When I was safe, clothed, and armed, my instinct was to help the girl that JB shot. When I was naked and alone, I felt no qualms about butchering a guy with a rock if I thought it would help me survive. What did I have to lose? It’s a lot harder to maintain one’s morals when you’re at the bottom of the food chain. I wondered if that rule would also apply if I were to lose everything in real life.

Sadly, while Goat Simulator made its way to mobile, Goat MMO Simulator isn't planned for mobile at the moment, according to a Coffee Stain representative, saying "We'll release it on PC first and see how it goats." We can only hope. The dream of being a goat and going anywhere my heart desired became a reality, and I believe I can be a level 101 goat wherever I go as well. Someday.

I don't personally like this tactic of making so many really good looking games exclusively for one console or another. I've never really bought consoles because of that nonsense. I mean, if you want to play these games, you're going to have to buy every console just because it isn't made for this other one that you do have even though it would work just fine on it if they did. That's a complete waste of money if you ask me. Makes me not want to give those jerks my money regardless of how good the game may be.

I know what you mean. The whole exclusivity thing is basically just Sony vs Microsoft, they need something to set them apart. Microsoft have also made deals to get timed exclusive content so they can release add-ons etc. on Xbox like a month before anything else. But it could also come down to personal preference. For me, I prefer what the PS4 has to offer over Xbox One.